MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7155181236 · doi:10.33024/jhm.v6i2.23864

Enforcement Comparison Law To Marijuana Drug Abuse In Indonesia And Canada

2025· article· W7155181236 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amonrat Ammartsena, Soviq Awabin, Piki Arjuna, Pasya Ayu Mashanda, Prasetio Agung Wibowo, Pina Endriyan Sinta

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Hukum Malahayati · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal and Social Justice Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegalizationCannabisSanctionsLaw enforcementPrinciple of legalityDecriminalizationPunishment (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Enforcement law to abuse narcotics type marijuana show difference fundamental between Indonesia and Canada. In Indonesia, marijuana categorized as narcotics group I, with enforcement law of a nature repressive and focused on prevention as well as eradication use and distribution. Sanctions applied covers punishment harsh prison terms and high fines. In Canada, on the other hand, marijuana has legalized For use medical and recreational under cannabis act since 2018. Policy in Canada is more emphasize on regulation, reduction danger, and health society, with enforcement law directed at production and distribution illegal outside framework existing regulations. This study aims to analyze the comparative law enforcement against marijuana abuse in Indonesia and Canada. Using a qualitative descriptive method, this study presents the results related to the legal policies in force in both countries. In Indonesia, marijuana is classified as a class I narcotic based on Law No. 35 of 2009, with a strict legal approach without tolerance. Meanwhile, in Canada, marijuana is legalized through the 2018 Marijuana Act, with a policy that prioritizes legality and rehabilitation. Although the two countries have different approaches, both use positive law as the basis for imposing sanctions. Based on study This obtained conclusion namely Indonesia and Canada have different and similar views regarding law enforcement regarding the abuse of narcotics such as marijuana, apart from that it is different from Indonesia, Canada in enforcing the law on marijuana abuse actually issued the Cannabis Act as a form of legalization of marijuana narcotics, the Cannabis Legalization Act (The Cannabis Act). From this conclusion, the author can provide advice that Indonesia needs to continue to develop legal policies that not only emphasize severe punishment but also consider aspects of rehabilitation for drug abusers, in addition there is a program to adopt several approaches implemented in Canada, such as strengthening rehabilitation programs for marijuana abusers, can be an effective alternative in handling drug abuse cases. Kata Kunci : Law Enforcement, Drug Abuse, Marijuana

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.541
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Hukum MalahayatiSame topicLegal and Social Justice StudiesFrench-language works237,207